Merry wrote:Frankly, given the wide choice of breeds available if one wants to own a dog, I still don't understand why anybody would choose a breed that is known to have the highest incidence of attacks (and that's the pit bull).

Whether a particular pit bull is a "good" dog or not, one can't escape the fact that pit bulls are responsible for 50% of dog attacks on people. Which far surpasses the incidence of German shepherd attacks, so I don't understand your point Silverstarqueen.

Knowing that pit bulls have such a poor track record, I don't understand why anyone would want to take a chance with one, when there are so many other breeds to choose from.

We're not all lab and poodle people. I grew up with German Shepards and Dobermans. Then I lived with an APBT with a family member and experienced how smart, loving, devoted and funny they are. Mine have been wonderful members of our family. My boy passed away at 13 years last year and my girl is still kicking at 13 and a half. I enjoy the Bully breeds very much for their personalities..

Pitbull is slang term for a mutt that has short hair and a muscular body. It's not a breed. American Pitbull Terrier is an actual breed with a breed standard.

"Every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in.""My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."

The Alaskan Malamutes that killed the above little boy were known to be a problem but unfortunately the owners didn't get rid of them in time to prevent a death. Now those dogs have been put down. Too little too late.

This is about dogs. We don't dictate what type of vehicle someone drives, based on the models' good or bad track record. Drivers are expected to be responsible for their choices. Dog ownership is no different, we expect the owner to be responsible for the harm the dog caused, take more care with high energy dogs, or get a dog they can handle.

Last edited by Silverstarqueen on Nov 10th, 2017, 6:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

Dogs, in general, are not dangerous. There are a few which are handled badly (like many other things that people use/do) and can cause harm. Many human activities involve risk, such as bike riding etc. (risks far higher than dogs present), we don't ban them, we establish guidelines or laws, and penalties, so people will think about how to behave more safely during those activities. So securing dog on owner's property, socialization,secure leash when in public, muzzle if necessary, these are not extraordinary precautions to expect from dog owners. I know the regulations have had an effect, because I see far fewer dogs roaming loose than in the past. In my area, I know of one dog that was a problem (not a pitbull, not a German shepherd or rottweiler, not a husky), tended to get in fights with other dogs. He is no longer around.

"Statistics collected by the City of Edmonton reveal that American Staffordshire terriers — one of several breeds that are commonly known as pit bulls — were responsible for nearly 30 per cent of all reported fatal dog-on-dog attacks in the city between January 2013 and September 2017.

According to the city, there are approximately 1,848 dogs licensed as either American Staffordshire terrier or Staffordshire bull terrier, which equates to three per cent of the city's dog population.

"Staffordshire terriers are a small per cent of our population, so it's a very disproportionate number," Ward said.

"We shouldn't see them killing more than double the next highest breed, when there are so few of them in the city."

Of the nine fatal dog-on-dog attacks reported to date in 2017, American Staffordshire terriers were blamed for six.